Dutfields Yard interior photograph, 1900

[anna]

Well,I don't really mind whether Philip decides to show his picture,or not.

I wish him well with his new find.

ANNA.

[Monty]

A difference.

[Sam Flynn]

the image will be posted, tomorrow, with clear watermarks on it bearing my name

Your real name of course, Phil. Gawd 'elp us if we see a picture of a Ripper murder-site with the words "George Hutchinson" emblazoned on the wall.

[Monty]

A difference

There is a difference between the Sept 17th letter and the Dutfields yard photo.

Visually the yard photo is spot on with regards the rooftops, yard dimensions, workshop at the back etc. The letter holds none of these and, in all honesty, if both prove to be genuine, has a lesser importance compared to this photo.

Monty.

[Steve S]

however we should get this into perspective - it is a photograph of one of the murder sites that has never appeared photographically before. It does not claim to be Mary Kelly's retina, or a missing photo of the GSG or what have you. It's a place!

Think that sums up my feelings.....Nice find,Phil...Look forward to seeing it...
Steve

[Monty]

AP

I know the amount of hours Rob puts into his research, hell he spent most of last week in a fruitless search at LMA.

When you see the photo, then compare it to the one Rob supplies, you will understand that his words are fact.

Believe me, he wouldnt put his reputation on the line unless he is certain.

[Robert]

I'm wondering if this lady took pics of the other murder sites (in particular, Kelly's) but I assume Philip's already investigated that.

I'll accept it as genuine, anyway - even if there aren't any grape stalks.

[John Bennett]

I'm wondering if this lady took pics of the other murder sites (in particular, Kelly's) but I assume Philip's already investigated that.

Ooh, trust me, Phil (and others) have worked bloody hard to trace this photograph's provenance and to make sure we will all be looking at what we think we're looking at. If you get my drift.

JB

[Suzi]

Bugger! Not a grape stalk! ?? Well that's it then!!!

SERIOUSLY though Good Luck chaps- I BELIEVE- for what that's worth!!!

Hang in there and soddem I say!

Suz x

[Cap'n Jack]

From up your junction, Rob, but not from my back yard.

[Rob Clack]

From up your junction, Rob, but not from my back yard.

Then it should be easy for you to explain to us what buildings in Back Church Lane were blocking the view from Dutfields Yard to Commercial Road Goods Depot.

[Cap'n Jack]

No, Rob, it should be easy for you to explain to me why you originally suggested that the background buildings in the photo were in Back Church Lane, but then later changed that to Gower Walk.
That is not what I expect from a researcher of your caliber.
Just talk me through that sudden swerve.

[George Hutchinson]

I have had three hours sleep and just had to go out and give a tour. On my way back home I was given a very helpful phone call.

I have to clarify something else here - I had the idea to watermark the image with COPYRIGHT (as you will be seeing an image I have cleaned and restored) and FOR USE ONLY ON CASEBOOK.ORG

However, when I got home from the US, Stephen had had the same idea and sent a copy of the image to me ready prepared. HE had put my name on it and I thought it would be easier just to use the one he had worked on than to do a whole one again. However, I understand for some rather jealous people that my standing in the Ripper community is to some degree now lessened rather than strengthened by this find. As if the opinions of those particular people are important to me, or to anyone else for that matter. I like to be thought well of, but I don't give a flying f*** for the views of people who have no idea at present what they're talking about in the face of overwhelming approval from those that have seen it. NO ONE who has seen it has any doubt whatsoever.

Yes, as I have stated from the outset I do want my name linked with this. Big bloody deal. Is that really such an awful thing? Do people have a pop at Don Rumbelow because everyone knows he found the MJK images at Snow Hill in 1967? It's truly pathetic.

I am under no obligation to have told people about this and I am still under no obligation to share it. I did it because I feel it needs to be added to the Ripper history and because I'm a nice guy. It has pissed me off hugely that when you try to do something decent, some *******s will always take a contrary position. "You gave me $2 million - you bastard - why didn't you give me $3 million?" That's what these childish snipes are really saying and it's clear as day.

Another e-mail I got today said things pretty clearly as well - there's people on this site that wouldn't be happy even if I mailed them the original through the post to look at.

I don't have to give ANYTHING. But I AM. Those that haven't seen it, back off until you have. Then you can come out with your ill-informed accusations but you know you won't win.

I am going back to the jpeg now and am going to reduce the size and am going to overstamp it with COPYRIGHT and FOR USE ONLY ON CASEBOOK.ORG as I suggested. Then it will be e-mailed to Thomas Schachner who has agreed to post up a link to a server where it can be seen for the following 24 hours. Then it will disappear again until I've done the book. If that ain't enough for some of you then, as I've said before, tough.

Thanks in spades to those who have seen it who are coming on this thread to inform the others. Curious, isn't it, that no one who has seen it has any doubts?

PHILIP

[dyost]

Hi Guys,

For starters, Phil - congratulations on an excellent find!

I am anxious to see it, as nearly anything else to-date has been various newspaper sketches of the exterior (some of which don't reveal the mandoor very well) or verbal descriptions.

As for the disgruntled few...well...everyone is entitled to his/her interjections; although, I suppose they'd be happier if it were a contemporary photo of a guy with a knife and the shadow of a cart & pony. (When I get my time machine built, I'll bring back some souvenirs )

Dave

[Monty]

AP,

You really havent a leg to stand on regarding this issue. When you present the same standard of geographical research Rob has done then maybe, just maybe, others will take your accusasions seriously.

Monty